New York – As controversy continues to swirl around the Novominsker Rebbe’s public condemnation of Open Orthodoxy at the Agudah Dinner this past week, the Modern Orthodox Rabbi and author of a popular blog on Orthodox Jewish thought has publicly expressed his own assessment of Open Orthodoxy, agreeing that it is inconsistent with Orthodox Judaism.
Subscribe to our Daily Roundup Email
Rabbi Harry Maryles, a Chicago resident who writes the blog Emes V’emunah, said the despite the fallout from Rabbi Perlow’s remarks, there are times when it is imperative to speak out.
“There has been a lot of negative reaction, but sometimes you have to stand up and say the truth,” Maryles told VIN News. “When Torah hashkafa is being called into question you can’t let it go unchallenged.”
As previously reported on VIN News, Rabbi Perlow had harsh words for Open Orthodoxy, likening it to the Conservative and Reform movements and calling it “heresy.”
Maryles, who was in Rabbi Perlow’s 12th grade shiur at Beis Medrash L’Torah in Skokie,Illinois believes that there are two components that are integral to being an Orthodox Jew.
“One is the belief system, believing that the events in the Torah actually happened,” said Maryles. “The second is following the mitzvos. Those are the two things that make you Orthodox.”
Of particular concern to Maryles are public statements made by proponents of Open Orthodoxy, including Rabbi Zev Farber, a graduate of Yeshiva Chovevei Torah.
“After studying bible critics, he very strongly questioned whether events in the Torah actually happened and said that they were allegorical,” said Maryles. “No Torah was given at Sinai. Moshe Rabbeinu didn’t exist. The Avos didn’t exist. His understanding of the Torah is that it was an unfolding revelation and that while the bible is divinely inspired, the actual events described couldn’t have happened. This is apikorsus and has be to labeled as that.”
Allowing for the possibility that the events in the Torah didn’t actually take place puts Open Orthodoxy in the same category as Conservative Judiasm, says Maryles.
“Conservatives don’t require you to believe in biblical criticism, but they consider it legitimate and Open Orthodoxy is doing the same thing,” noted Maryles. “In terms of theology they are the same. That is kefira and violates at least some of the thirteen ikarim of the Rambam, which we have accepted as the basis of our faith for generations.”
Rabbi Asher Lopatin, president of Yeshiva Chovevei Torah, which describes itself as an “open Modern Orthodox rabbinical school”, invited Rabbi Perlow to further discuss the issue at hand.
“I welcome the Novominsker into the conversation of how all of us Orthodox Jews can bring the light of Torah to all Jews, in a meaningful way,” said Rabbi Lopatin. “Yes, the Novominsker Rebbe’s words were harsh, especially for a fellow Chicagoan, but I hope it can lead to a healthy engagement and discussion. We at Yeshiva Chovevei Torah, our talmidim and musmachim, are ready to learn from and listen to all who have a Torah message. That is what inclusive, passionate and Modern Orthodoxy is all about.”
Maryles said that his rejection of Open Orthodoxy has not necessarily been well received by all.
“I have gotten a lot of flak from my friends on the left, but I have to speak the truth. Proponents of Open Orthodoxy claim that they believe in the Torah but they allow someone like Zev Farber to be a member in good standing and they allow the negation of events in the Torah as part of their theology. You can’t do that and still call yourself Orthodox.”
While there were those who advised him to stay silent, saying that his statements would alienate those who currently consider themselves to be Open Orthodox, but might one day step up their religious observance and beliefs.
“You can’t accept kefira as a method of kiruv,” observed Maryles.
Maryles declined to comment on whether or not the Agudah dinner was the proper venue for the Novominsker’s attack on Open Orthodoxy, although he agreed that with the secular media in attendance, it might not have been the best time to take on this topic.
“I am not going to second guess or criticize the Rebbe,” said Maryles. “I am not in a position to criticize someone of his stature but as a leading rabbi in America, he has a right to speak out.”
The bottom line in this whole debate is as the rabbi said. Do you believe in torah misinai or not. If you even just hesitate in your answer your not any kind of orthodox.
if only we weren’t so busy pointing fingers and trying to figure out who is frummer than who and focus a bit of that wasted energy on Ahavat (or Ahavos) Yisrael we ALL would be better off. Call me crazy but It would be nice to see gelodim & rebbes reach out more to the entire Klal (and not just “innzerrer” or the “heymeshe”) and focus more on the greater than 50% of the Torah laws which deal with Adam LeChavaro.
This is where Chabad excels and we all should learn from.
“‘… There are two components that are integral to being an Orthodox Jew. One is the belief system, believing that the events in the Torah actually happened,’ said Maryles. ‘The second is following the mitzvos'”
I submit that R. Maryles is half right. Following the mitzvos is integral. Believing the events in the Torah are historical fact is not. The latter is not the same as accepting the Divinity of the Torah, without which the whole system falls apart.
On the contrary, my late rav, R. Eliezer Cohen, often declared that if the events are allegory, the account is even MORE important than if they actually happened. I mean, Avraham avinu planted a tree one day; so what?
Are you seriously going to call me a kofer if I refuse to believe in a talking snake with legs?
““I welcome the Novominsker into the conversation of how all of us Orthodox Jews can bring the light of Torah to all Jews, in a meaningful way,” said Rabbi Lopatin. “
Mr. Lopatin, you don’t get it. Your pathetic scrabbling for recognition and inclusion (“us Orthodox Jews”) falls on deaf ears. You and your institution are outside the pale.
Good bye, and good riddance.
I have attended Rabbi Dov Linzer’s daf yomi shiur for three years. Not once have I heard him discuss academic bible criticism.
I also am completely unconvinced that this is a real problem. While there may be somebody, somewhere, who went off the derech after taking an academic bible course in college, I have never met such an individual.
It should also be pointed out that the Roman Catholic Church enthusiastically endorsed academic bible studies 70 years ago and continues to thrive — it is a non-issue for them.
Yeshivish, Chasidish, Central and Modern Orthodox are all vastly different in their approaches to both life and Torah each with its own accomplishments and failures, but it should be understood that the basic concept and acceptance of Halacha along with the basic beliefs link them together. Open Orthodoxy is on a path which if you follow to its natural conclusion will no longer be within the fold and will be considered a separate movement. Just as Conservative broke from Orthodox on Halacha and Reconstructionist broke from Conservative on Divinity of Gd, this path too will lead to a break. This is not to say that they are not Jews, but simply they are/will not be considered Orthodox. I’m neither judging nor condemning, Im simply stating the truth.
novominsker rebbe does not need defenders he just spoke the emes we don’t have to look good by goim or homos we should not debate or discuss with jewish apikorsim that is a halacha kolshken depukar tfei.
these are not chovevei torah but machrivei torah vehadas sonai hashem
Rabbi Maryles, This is Eliezer who always criticizes you on your blog.
You did the right thing here. Thank you (or as we Chareidim say, Yasher Koach!)
Rabbi Harry Maryles is right on the mark on this one! Unfortunatley Rabbi Lopatin totally misses the point.
Fool. As soon as they are done cutting down OO they will turn back to ripping you apart for being MO. Ad hayom the AY can’t bring itself to give any recognition to your own rosh yeshiva ztl”l or his brother R YD Soloveitchik ztz”l. The AY mouthpiece, may it continue to rest in peace, the (Only We Are Really) Jewish (Enough) Observer couldn’t even print ztz”l for Rav YDS, a title they bestowed on every plumber in a streimel.
I’d like to see two YCT guys debate the Rebbe and one other Big Rav like Shacter, YU.
Why were secular people invited to attend the Agudah Dinner??? Could you explain to me the benefit of fighting in public? Was this a good idea, even if you believe it is true.
Maybe you could have invited Rabbi Lopatin and had a chavrusah with him and convince him he needs to change his ideas.
um… maybe all the people attacking the commenter for being skeptical that the story of the snake literally happened should learn the opinions of the Ramban and the many other RIshonim who agree with him- although I have no doubt you’d call the Rambam a kofer too if he was alive today.
“I welcome the Novominsker into the conversation of how all of us Orthodox Jews can bring the light of Torah to all Jews, in a meaningful way,” said Rabbi Lopatin.
Lopata in russian means a showel that you dig with,
This “Rabbi” Lopatin is trying to bury our holy Torah and Emuna that we have.
“clearly”. thanks for sharing that insight with me. Shavua Tov to you 🙂
“‘… There are two components that are integral to being an Orthodox Jew. One is the belief system, believing that the events in the Torah actually happened,’ said Maryles. ‘The second is following the mitzvos'”
I think it’s important to look at both aspects of the dichotomy that R. Maryles posits. There’s a term I’ve heard used: “orthopractic” (adj.) or “orthopraxis” (n.). That is, someone who follows the mitsvot… even if hesitant regarding the first half of the formula…
In fact, Open O Jews are shomrei mitsvot and that is a very good thing. To accuse them or their proponents of not being Orthodox is mistaken in my opinion. What any one of us believes (truly believes) when standing before G-d, is always a private mystery and a matter between Man and G-d…
I say YCT is pioneering a perspective that will enhance Kiruv…